On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Marion & Christophe JAILLET <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > 1 typo below.
Fixed in r1715938, thanks. > > Moreover, this kind of patch is a good candidate for backport as it > introduces many small differences between 2.4 and trunk. > Without a backport, backporting future patches may become a nightmare. Agreed. > > I would find useful to split it into several pieces. > The first one should apply cleanly to 2.4.x to ease backport. > Other parts should be splitted in "as many piece as necessary" for potential > future backport. I'll try to merge with svn, and resolve conflicts... Regards, Yann.
